Greenwich Council

Agenda, decisions and minutes

Venue: Rooms 4 & 5, Town Hall, Wellington Street, Woolwich SE18 6PW

Contact: Jasmine Kassim  Email: jasmine.kassim@royalgreenwich.gov.uk or tel: 020 8921 5146

Items
No. Item

1.

Apologies for Absence

To receive apologies for absence from Members of the Committee.

Minutes:

Apologies for absence were recevied on behalf of Councillors Stephen Brain, Sizwe James, Paul Morrissey, Rajinder Sehmar, and Danny Thorpe.

2.

Urgent Business

The Chair to announce any items of urgent business circulated separately from the main agenda.

Minutes:

There was no urgent business.

3.

Declarations of Interest pdf icon PDF 48 KB

Members to declare any personal and financial interests in items on the agenda.  Attention is drawn to the Council’s Constitution; the Council’s Code of Conduct and associated advice.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Resolved –

 

That the list of Councillors’ memberships as Council appointed representatives on outside bodies, joint committees and school governing bodies be noted.

4.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 52 KB

Members are requested to confirm as an accurate record the Minutes of the meeting held on 22 April 2015.

 

No motion or discussion may take place upon the Minutes except as to their accuracy, and any question on this point will be determined by a majority of the Members of the body attending who were present when the matter in question was decided.  Once confirmed, with or without amendment, the person presiding will sign the Minutes.

Minutes:

Resolved -

 

That the minutes of the meeting of the Highways Committee held on 22nd April 2014, be agreed and signed as a true and accurate record.

5.

Update on the Highways Improvement and Local Labour Project pdf icon PDF 52 KB

To note the progress made in the delivery of the Highways Improvement & Local Labour (HILL) project and, review and provide comments on the proposed list of footway and street lighting improvements, to be delivered in 2015/16 as part of the project.

 

Additional documents:

Decision:

 i.          That progress made in the delivery of the Highways Improvement & Local Labour (HILL) project, be noted.

 

ii.          That comments by the Committee on the proposed list of footway and street lighting improvements, to be delivered in 2015/16 as part of the project, be noted.

 

 

Minutes:

The Assistant Director (Transport) gave an update report to the Committee, highlighting progress in relation to the Highways Improvement and Local Labour (HILL) project.

 

The Committee noted the report, and that the figure of £950k under Appendix B in relation to total of planned spend of the scheme should be £400k.  The Committee also welcomed information that the work programme for 2014/15 had progressed according to plan, and that work on proposed schedules for 2015/16 was underway.

 

Resolved –

 

i.              That progress made in the delivery of the Highways Improvement & Local Labour (HILL) project, be noted.

 

ii.              That the proposed list of footway and street lighting improvements, to be delivered in 2015/16 as part of the project, be noted.

 

6.

Request for Traffic Calming at Restons Crescent - Response to a Petition pdf icon PDF 62 KB

To note and comment upon the proposed petition response, presented in this report, which is to be summarised and submitted to Council on 24 June 2015.

 

Decision:

That comments by the Committee on the proposed petition response, presented in this report, which is to be summarised and submitted to Council on 24 June 2015, be noted.

 

Minutes:

The Group Manager (Traffic and Parking) presented the report to the Committee, and highlighted residents’ concerns outlined in a petition that was presented to Council with 81 signatures.  It was stated that the petitioners had expressed concerns about inconsiderate driving, including driving against the one-way system on the eastern end of Restons Crescent.

 

The Committee noted the report.  It was recognised that the Council had adopted a policy to phase in 20mph zones on all residential roads in the Royal Borough of Greenwich (Royal Borough). 

 

In response to questions raised, the Officer advised the Committee that the introduction of 20mph zones, with traffic calming features was appropriate, and would likely address the petitioners’ concerns.   However, the 20mph programme had to be prioritised on the number and severity of collisions, and incidents involving vulnerable road users.  It was stated that in the last three years, there had been two collisions at Restons Crescent involving a minor and a cyclist, and that had to be prioritised against other areas of higher levels of incidents and more severe collisions within the Royal Borough. 

 

The Officer responded to further questions, informing the Committee that the current speed limit on Restons Crescent continued to be 30mph.  Notwithstanding that, plans to implement 20mph zone in Anstridge Road had been scheduled as a priority for 2017/18 and in view of that work, Restons Crescent would be included because of its location in the area.  However, the powers to deal with inconsiderate drivers on the wrong way along Restons Crescent rested with the police, and not the Council.

 

Members noted the submission, and were satisfied that plans were in place to address residents’ concerns through the introduction of 20mph in areas at and around Restons Crescent.

 

Resolved –

 

That the proposed petition response submitted to Council on 24 June 2015 be noted.

 

7.

Calling for the introduction of residents permit parking in the southern section of Mycenae Road - Response to a Petition pdf icon PDF 58 KB

To note and comment upon the proposed petition response, as presented in this report, which is to be provided to the lead petitioner.

 

Decision:

That comments by the Committee on proposed petition response, as presented in this report, which is to be provided to the lead petitioner, be noted.

 

Minutes:

The Group Manager (Traffic and Parking) presented the report to the Committee, highlighting residents’ concerns in a petition presented to Council with 17 signatures.  It was stated that the petitioners were requesting that the Council introduce residents’ parking controls at Mycenae Road at the earliest opportunity, and before commencement of construction works at Blackheath High School.

 

The Committee noted the report, together with various correspondences circulated at the meeting.

 

The meeting was addressed by a representative for residents living at Mycenae Road.  The representative pointed out that Blackheath High School and Mycenae Road were located in the catchment of the Westcombe Park area.  Thus, in view of proposed works, residents felt that consideration of parking controls could be rushed through should it becomes apparent for construction to commence.  In particular, the Travel Plan for the proposed construction works at Blackheath High School omitted to specify requirements for a parking review.  Thus, residents were suggesting to the Committee to request that Officers include in the Construction Management Plan arrangements for parking, with plans to pre-empt the installation of temporary parking for Mycenae Road residents until a review of the Westcombe Park CPZ was conducted and evaluated, and the findings implemented.

 

In light of questions raised, the Officer confirmed that since 2007, the Council had received a relatively low number of complaints or request for a review in regards to the Westcombe Park Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ).  Specifically, the impact of the proposed development on access, parking and traffic arrangements in the surrounding areas would have formed part of the planning application process for the consented scheme.  Therefore, although no time had been identified for construction works to commence Blackheath High School, a review of roads in that area had been scheduled to take place in October 2015, which would provide an opportunity to investigate traffic control arrangements in Mycenae Road. 

 

In considering submissions made at the meeting, the Committee was satisfied that the proposed review would likely address residents’ concerns.

 

Resolved –

 

That the proposed petition response, as presented in the report, which is to be provided to the lead petitioner, be noted.

8.

Avery Hill Road / Footscray Road Traffic Signals - Response to a Petition pdf icon PDF 65 KB

To note and comment upon the proposed petition response, as presented in this report, which is to be summarised and submitted to Council on 24 June 2015.

 

Decision:

That the proposed petition response, as presented in this report, which is to be summarised and submitted to Council on 24 June 2015, be noted.

 

Minutes:

The Assistant Director (Transport) presented the report to the Committee, highlighting residents’ concerns outlined in a petition presented to Council with 183 signatures.  It was stated that the petitioners had expressed concerns about delays to traffic and congestion on the roads leading to the junction of Avery Hill Road, Footscray Road and Southwood Road.

 

The Committee noted the report.

 

In response to questions raised, the Assistant Director advised the Committee that traffic signal operated at the junction of Footscray Road, Avery Hill and Southwood Road.  The operation at the junction presented a challenge but a survey of the area would be carried out in June 2015.  Thereafter, testing and validation of the findings would take place, with the aim to select alternative modelling arrangements. Given the location of the junction, there was no guarantee that the modelling exercise would identify plans for a significant improvement, but the Council would work with officials at Transport for London (TfL) to develop and agree the best possible options to address the challenge of competing traffic demands in the area.

 

The Committee noted submissions made and welcomed information that the Council was in discussions with officials at TfL to seek the best option to address the challenge of competing traffic demands on the roads leading to the junction of Avery Hill Road, Footscray Road and Southwood Road, and the surrounding areas.

 

Resolved –

 

That the proposed petition response, as presented in the report, which is to be summarised and submitted to Council on 24 June 2015, be noted.

9.

Request for one-way working in Sandy Hill Road - Response to a Petition pdf icon PDF 65 KB

To note and comment upon the proposed petition response, presented in this report, which is to be summarised and submitted to Council on 24 June 2015.

Decision:

 i.             That the proposed petition response, as presented in this report, which is to be summarised and submitted to Council on 24 June 2015, be noted.

 

ii.             That the Committee’s suggestions be noted as follows:

·                To undertake count and flow of traffic speed between Sandy Hill Road and Brookhill Road, and Sandy Hill Road and Crescent Road, and consult with residents, with the aim to:

a.            relocate the existing parking bays in the middle of Sandy Hill Road (outside no’s 8 and 10) and relocate them to the south-eastern end of the parking bay;

b.            identify ways to improve signage to ‘right of way’ for traffic on the roads;

c.            identify the possibility of a pavement parking; and

d.            monitor and report back after a six-month period

 

Minutes:

The Group Manager (Traffic and Parking) presented the report to the Committee, highlighting residents’ concerns in a petition presented to Council with 144 signatures.  It was stated that the petitioners were requesting that Sandy Hill Road should be a one-way traffic, and that footways at section on Sandy Hill Road should be widened

 

The Committee noted the report.

 

A resident addressed the meeting, advising the Committee that the request in the petition for one-way motor access was to minimise traffic congestion on the road, as motorists and pedestrians were often faced with delays and had to manage unsafe situations.  In particular, because of the narrowness of Sandy Hill Road, motorists often had to drive on pavements, thereby putting their lives and that of members of the public at risk.  Thus, the Committee was asked to endorse the petition request, in order to improve conditions for motorists, residents and pedestrians on Sandy Hill Road.  The Committee was also asked to note that it was the intention of residents to maintain on-street parking on Sandy Hill Road.

 

In response to questions raised, the Officer advised the Committee that traffic management measures were operating on Sandy Hill Road and adjacent roads.  Thus, the introduction of a one-way system would impact on the pattern of traffic movements in the area.  Furthermore, no motor collisions resulting in personal injuries had been reported in recent years on Sandy Hill Road, except for what was described by the police as a ‘slight’ incident in January 2008.

 

The Committee also received clarification by the Officer that widening of Sandy Hill Road would to an extent address residents’ concerns about congestions.  However, there was no guarantee that it would minimise the volume of traffic on the street.  It was further advised that there were cost implications associated with widening of the footpath on Sandy Hill Road, in the region of £25k to £30k, and again, the footpath could not be widened significantly because of the narrowness of its width.

 

In considering submissions made at the meeting, the Committee was of the view in light of safety concerns by residents, it was reasonable to consider undertaking some alterations on Sandy Hill Road and the footpath.  Thus, officers should undertake count and flow of traffic speed between Sandy Hill Road and Brookhill Road, and Sandy Hill Road and Crescent Road, and consult with residents, with the aim to remove the existing parking bays in the middle of Sandy Hill Road (outside no’s 8 and 10) and relocate them to the south-eastern end of the parking bay.  It was further suggested that officers should identify ways to improve signage to ‘right of way’ for traffic on the roads, identify the possibility of a pavement parking, and monitor and report back to the Committee after a six-month period.

 

Resolved

 

 i.             That the proposed petition response, as presented in the report, which is to be summarised and submitted to Council on 24 June 2015, be noted.

 

ii.             That officers undertake count and flow  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

10.

Avery Hill Road proposed new Toucan Crossing - Response to a Petition pdf icon PDF 95 KB

To note the contents of the petition and the concerns of local residents, as summarised in this report, and the responses of officers to the issues raised, and the view of officers that the introduction of a toucan crossing by Anstridge Path should take place together with the re-location of the bus stop on a permanent basis to a position outside 286/288 Avery Hill Road. 

To also advise the Cabinet member for Regeneration and Transport of the views of the Committee prior to a decision on the proposal being taken, and note that the content of this report, along with any resolution of the Committee, is to be summarised and submitted to Council on 24 June 2015.

 

Additional documents:

Decision:

 i.             That the contents of the petition and the concerns of local residents, as summarised in this report, and the responses of officers to the issues raised be noted.

 

ii.             That the view of officers that the introduction of a toucan crossing by Anstridge Path should take place together with the re-location of the bus stop on a permanent basis to a position outside 286/288 Avery Hill Road be noted.

 

iii.             That it be agreed to advise the Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Transport that the Committee welcomes the proposed introduction of toucan crossing by Anstridge Path and the re-location of the bus stop on a permanent basis to a position outside 286/288 Avery Hill Road also requested that the possibility of widening the pavement be explored.

 

iv.             That the content of this report, along with any resolution of the Committee (above) be summarised and submitted to Council on 24 June 2015.

 

v.             That the Committee’s suggestion be noted as follows:

·                To consider the possibility of widening the pavement on Avery Hill Road, with the aim to minimise traffic congestion in the area.

 

 

Minutes:

The Group Manager (Traffic and Parking) presented the report to the Committee, highlighting residents’ concerns in a petition presented to Council with 144 signatures.  It was stated that the petitioners were requesting reconsideration of plans to provide a toucan pedestrian crossing on Avery Hill Road, at the point where Anstridge Path meets Avery Hill Road, which would allow for the relocation of a bus stop on the eastern side of Avery Hill Road further southwards outside 286/288 Avery Hill Road.

 

The Committee noted the report, together with various correspondences circulated at the meeting.

 

Three residents addressed the meeting and expressed similar views.  They asked the Committee to note residents’ disappointment in regards to the consultation process, as no contact was made after a site visit by Council officers on 29th January 2015.  The residents stated that as a result, all of the relevant viewpoints could not have been taken into account by Council officers when formulating the options in the report.  In particular, the recommended option, if approved, would create hazards to residents, and place bus users in danger at the proposed road island.  It was stated that there were also risks associated with vehicles overtaking at the proposed bus stop. 

 

The Committee noted residents’ concerns about safe exit by cars from residential driveways close to the proposed bus stop, particularly at Nos. 286 and 288 of Avery Hill Road.  The residents also pointed out the officers had made no suggestion in the report of ways to tackle noise and vibration from buses in residential areas, particularly at night time.  It was stated that the report also omitted to suggest plans to deal with over-crowding, loitering and littering that would occur in the residential area as a result of the proposed option.

 

The residents continued by requesting that Committee should suggest a review of the options in the report, with a view of relocating the southbound bus stop to its original position on Anstridge Path.  It was stated that the northbound bus stop should be moved further north on the road, away from residential dwellings.  The Committee was also asked to consider an alternative solution by requiring Council officers to leave the bus stop at Anstridge Path, and erect the proposed toucan crossing on the space that was previously identified for the proposed bus stop in the consulted plan.  The residents stated that the alternative suggestion would also be favourable to residents, and support the majority of users to and from the University of Greenwich campus.  It was stated that either of suggested options would minimise the risk of motor accidents and congestion by balancing traffic flow.  Thus, road safety would be enhanced for pedestrians, passengers waiting at bus stops, students and visitors in the area, and residents. 

 

Commenting on views expressed by residents’ at the meeting, Members enquired about the adequacy of the consultation exercise, and the effectiveness of the decision in selecting the proposed option, and the consideration of risks to motorists, pedestrians and residents. 

 

In response,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.